Spellcaster backgrounds


Although the central place for design discussion is ##crawl-dev on freenode, some may find it helpful to discuss requests and suggestions here first.

Dungeon Master

Posts: 1531

Joined: Saturday, 5th March 2011, 06:29

Post Sunday, 6th March 2011, 00:06

Spellcaster backgrounds

I've been having some thoughts about the various magic user backgrounds. These follow on from my own playing and a number of other threads here so I thought I'd sum up my own ideas in one place.

There are really quite a lot of magic backgrounds but a lot of them had only very minor differentiations; usually just down to which starting book they get, and an initial boost in the relevant skill(s). Since one design goal is to reduce the overall number of backgrounds, I think there are some very easy ways to clear all this up a bit.

Additionally there are some things that don't quite make sense to me as I've been observing the recent changes to some of these backgrounds.

1. Have just one background for Elementalist. You can then choose Earth / Air / Fire / Water as a sub option, the same way it works for many other backgrounds who then choose their weapon speciality.

2. Conjurors; why are there only Fire/Earth and Ice/Air options? Why not Fire/Air and Earth/Ice? Air is an extremely useful school due to Repel/Deflect, Swiftness/Haste etc. and it'd be nice to have a Fire conjuror who was suited to going down that route.

3. Warper/Enchanter/Summoner/Necromancer/Transmuter/Venom Mage. Really these are all "Magic Specialists" who start fitted out for a particular spell school. Why not condense all of these into a single background, then give a choice of the school in which you want to specialise. It's pretty confusing the order in which they're littered around the menu - i.e. Warper appears before Wizard, Venom Mage after the Elementalists. Further on this, the Elementalists are really just specialists in a particular elemental school, however I think the concept of Elementalist deserves to be kept separate.

4. Wizards. These are supposed to be "magic generalists". And yet they start with two Air school spells (Repel, Mephitic) and one Fire spell (Conjure Flame). So most of my wizards very quickly become Fire/Air specialists and will struggle to learn any Earth or Ice due to them being in conflict with Fire and Air. This makes them seem instead of as a generalist, more like the Fire/Air conjuror I mentioned above. Additionally, wizards are seriously lacking a decent attack spell above Magic Dart. I end up using a Conjure Flame / Mephitic Cloud combo to dispatch any tough monsters; which is fun, but again is forcing me down the Fire / Air route.

Further to this, I'm kind of thinking it would be a good idea if Wizards started with Sif Muna. This makes sense from a realism perspective, since Sif is supposed to be the "magic generalist" God. You could argue that either Sif or Wizard would require a nerf in this case; but I argue that Sif isn't necessarily that great as it stands - all the boons are attainable via other means one way or another as the game progresses, and if I'm unlucky enough to not find an early altar or Temple (and even worse, if there's no Sif altar in the temple - doesn't happen a lot but it's really annoying) then I have basically no change of getting the required piety for any spellbook gifts by the time I need them and/or decent ones start just showing up anyway. From a number of other comments and my own experience, it seems Vehumet is just way better in nearly all games. So Wizard/Sif is currently in need of some kind of buff since it should be the default choice if you want an all-out magic character. If not as a starting God, then maybe Sif needs a few other perks once you get to 4, 5 or 6 piety?

Just to elaborate on Sif's perks;

- MP channeling. There are crystal balls, staves, Vehument's (and other Gods') MP-for-kills, sublimation, etc.
- Miscast protection. A fairly minor bonus if you train your skills up well.
- Forgetting spells. By managing my spell progression carefully I should be able to make do with scrolls and maybe Selective Amnesia. This basically just gives you a small extra spell slot at the expense of piety, which is really hard to gain at high skill levels.
- Books. Sif mostly just gives me total rubbish even once I get enough piety to receive gifts. I find most of the spells I need just lying around the dungeon and in shops before Sif gives me them, for the most part.

Regarding piety gain; it seems to get really hard to earn piety once you've raised your skills significantly. The wiki indicates this is because it takes more XP at higher levels. Basically, this is penalising players for managing to train their skills up early, or if they don't find a Sif altar soon enough. Perhaps there should be a piety bonus the moment you start worshipping, relative to how much XP you've put into your spell skills so far (perhaps divided by how many turns you've been in the dungeon, to keep it balanced).

Some ideas for better bonuses could be;

- Being able to request which skill school you'd like a book for, or even being able to ask for specific spells from time to time, even just once at a certain piety level.
- Awarding extra spell slots / points.
- Allowing you to redistribute XP between your spell skills, akin to Ashenzari.
- Occasionally gifting otherwise unobtainable artefacts; special staves, wizard hats, robes, etc.

Well, this is just a summary of a number of possibilities I've thought of, I'm certain there are reasons against many of them! :)

Dungeon Master

Posts: 1531

Joined: Saturday, 5th March 2011, 06:29

Post Sunday, 6th March 2011, 00:31

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

Hmm... I wrote a further edit to that post and was then told "you can no longer edit this post"!

I listed Enchanter as one of the "Magic Specialist" backgrounds - but this is clearly not the case. It's really a hybrid fighter/spellcaster, as is Arcane Marksman.

Since the recent split of Enchantments -> Charms / Hexes, the name Enchanter is kind of irrelevant and misleading.

Additionally, the book that the Marksman gets is what I'd really like to start with as an Enchanter, to buff my sword for melee. Instead, the Enchanter gets mainly Hex spells for affecting other monsters. On the other hand, most of the Marksman's spells in the Book of Brands seem to me more like Charms (even though currently they're Hexes), since they affect your character (or at least their weapon) in a positive way.

My suggestion here is to rename Enchanter -> Hexer (maybe a better name than that, "Infuriator" perhaps?) and Arcane Marksman -> Charmer. Then give both of these backgrounds a choice of starting weapon. Obviously, "Sure Blade" would need rethinking for a bow-wielding Hexer.

In some ways it's a shame to lose the Arcane Marksman name because it's so awesome; on the other hand, this could still be used as a character title. I think this would be consistent with the overall generalisation of the backgrounds.

Edit: And as a final, final edit, perhaps the Transmuter should still be a background all of its own, since it's also more of a hybrid. Obviously all these hybrids also need slightly more strength than other casters, since they need to carry around weapons, ammo, destructive potions, etc.

Vaults Vanquisher

Posts: 447

Joined: Thursday, 16th December 2010, 22:10

Post Sunday, 6th March 2011, 02:07

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

dpeg wrote:All kinds of backgrounds could be conflated. My personal yardstick is this: Reading a combination (or its abbreviation), how much does it tell you about the character? And here you see that Priest didn't say a lot, so we split it up. The choices among Fighters, say, are much less crucial. Having one Elementalist background would make the subchoice more relevant than the nominal background. And that's why I don't like that idea so much.

Lair Larrikin

Posts: 20

Joined: Wednesday, 9th February 2011, 21:38

Post Sunday, 6th March 2011, 02:24

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

Hmm what exactly would an element free starting book look like for wizards? Maybe something like this.

Magic Dart
Call Imp
Blink
Sticks to Snakes
Slow
Confuse
Iskenderun's Mystic Blast

Although I'm not too sure about having both slow and confusion. Maybe replace one with something like cure poison or sublimation of blood to help them break into more magic schools.

Ziggurat Zagger

Posts: 3037

Joined: Sunday, 2nd January 2011, 02:06

Post Sunday, 6th March 2011, 03:56

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

I genuinely dislike the idea of saddling wizards with Sif Muna. Wizards are generalists who lack a focus. Vehumet and Kiku specifically offer this focus as their main early-game perk. Sif Muna offers generalism to casters that don't have it yet.

I'd rather de-couple elementalists from being four flavors of surplus conjurors than fuse them. Back of the envelope:

Air: just use the current book; it's perfect.

Fire: Flame Tongue, Throw Flame, Evaporate, Conjure Flame, Sticky Flame

Cold: Freeze, Throw Frost, Ensorcelled Hibernation, Freezing Aura, Ozocubu's Armor

Earth: Sandblast, Stoneskin, Stone Arrow, Petrify, Leda's Liquefaction

Ideally, each of them should have sufficient non-conjuration spells that an elementalist caster wouldn't be railroaded towards a conjuration build every time regardless of what comes up in-game, but fire doesn't really give much to work with. I'm of the opinion that a starting spellbook should not contain all you need for an entire three-Rune game, so I'd terminate the 6th-level spells on general principle. Throw Icicle is also problematic because an elementalist starting book probably shouldn't contain a tool specifically to ignore elemental resistance to that element.

I see no reason for a conjuror background to exist, because the majority of other magic backgrounds also start with enough conjuration to make a specific conjuror class redundant. The conjuror background is like having a Fencer background that starts with a short sword, but is also otherwise similar to the Fighter and Gladiator backgrounds that also allow you to start with a short sword.

Dungeon Dilettante

Posts: 3

Joined: Monday, 7th March 2011, 09:12

Post Monday, 7th March 2011, 10:35

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

I would support conflating some of the caster classes. The array of choices presented when starting a new character is bewildering, and too many of them feel extremely similar. Elementalist -> pick an element makes sense to me.

Instead, the Enchanter gets mainly Hex spells for affecting other monsters.


Maybe differentiate it even more as a debuff class?

My suggestion here is to rename Enchanter -> Hexer


"Hex" derives from the German "hexe", which means "witch". Witch?

TGW

Halls Hopper

Posts: 82

Joined: Thursday, 16th December 2010, 22:14

Post Monday, 7th March 2011, 11:58

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

Elementalists have completely different books and playstyles.
User avatar

Vestibule Violator

Posts: 1459

Joined: Sunday, 19th December 2010, 05:45

Location: New England

Post Monday, 7th March 2011, 12:51

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

I think the simplest way to understand the whole role division philosophy is to consider the abbreviations. You should be able to tell someone just 4 letters, and they should immediately understand, to first order, what kind of game you're playing.

If I say DEAE, you know I'm probably playing as a glass cannon, with a heavy focus on abusing the terrain to maximize the impact of shock, and exploiting the air enchantments. If I say DEFE, it changes to a glass cannon concerned with maximum exploditude. DEIE means you're a glass cannon forced to initially rely on a touch spell, and whose core damage dealing spell is single target. Etc. It's not an exact science, but you can guess a lot of the build / play-style barring major reskillings or hybridizations. It gives a nice, easy common ground to start a conversation about a given game. A lot of information is given in just 4 characters. It's sorta elegant, actually.

Too much merging spoils this. If, for instance, we combine the 4 experimentalists, then DEEl doesn't give any useful information. You know a DE is a glass cannon. You don't know what kind of glass cannon it is unless the player elaborates. The "of fire", "of ice", etc you'd tag on the end is more significant than the "El".

In physics-geek terminology: the race/class combination should have a first order effect on gameplay. Sub choices made afterwards (book, weapon, etc) should have at most a second order effect. If merging two classes produces first order choices after race/class, it shouldn't happen. Conversely, if first order choices do occur post race class, then revision is necessary

This explains, for example, the rational behind limiting chaos knights to one god and creating abyssal knights, or the merging of the 3 wizards books. Right now, I can only think of one sub choice left that really has a first order effect on game-play: god choice for Priests. Although this is gonna be fixed in 0.8 since Yred is moving to death knights, and since the choice between Zin & Beogh exists for only one race (and who plays HOPr's of Zin :roll: ).

Dungeon Master

Posts: 1531

Joined: Saturday, 5th March 2011, 06:29

Post Monday, 7th March 2011, 13:10

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

Ok, I can see the rationale behind the 4-letter descriptions. I think this still leaves a problem with Conjurors because Fire/Earth vs Ice/Air will result in a significantly different playstyle - since Ice/Air spells are geared a lot more towards evasion and self-buffs. Additionally we now have the problem that a DEWz could be really ANY magical playstyle and you'll know little from seeing that combo except that they're a glass cannon with probably lots of spells!

I think something that would help the background menu a lot is simply reordering the spellcasters so it follows a bit more logic;

Wizard
Conjuror
Summoner
Necromancer
Warper
Transmuter
Venom Mage
4 Elementalists
Enchanter
Arcane Marksman

(+ move Assasin, Hunter, Artificer to before the spellcasters)

I've tried to order things so they basically follow the same order as the skills menu in-game.

Avarice wrote:Hmm what exactly would an element free starting book look like for wizards? Maybe something like this.

Magic Dart
Call Imp
Blink
Sticks to Snakes
Slow
Confuse
Iskenderun's Mystic Blast

Although I'm not too sure about having both slow and confusion. Maybe replace one with something like cure poison or sublimation of blood to help them break into more magic schools.


Instead I think the wizard should have at least one spell from *each* elemental school.

Magic Dart
Call Imp
Blink
Freeze
Conjure Flame
Repel Missiles (essential for survival vs. centaurs etc.)

... Not sure for Earth. Maybe even Stone Arrow, so there's at least one L3 projectile. However this has eliminated Mephitic Cloud - maybe that should still be in there and the wizard does just start with a decent amout of spells available, which you'd kind of expect from a strongly magic-based class.

I also like the idea of IMB but maybe it's a bit overpowered for a starting spell. It'd be nice to see a "pure conjurations" build that wasn't geared towards a specific element how Conjuror currently is.

Definitely like the idea of renaming Enchanter -> Witch.

Obviously for my Arcane Marksman -> Charmer idea, the choice between melee or ranged makes for a very different playstyle. Don't know how to get around this, but I do think the game is missing out on a melee-style Brands user.

Spider Stomper

Posts: 195

Joined: Thursday, 3rd February 2011, 13:14

Post Monday, 7th March 2011, 13:22

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

mumra wrote:Don't know how to get around this, but I do think the game is missing out on a melee-style Brands user.


Crusaders?
Crazy Yiuf mutters: "Good: bonuses. Bad: Boni. Ugly: Bonii!"

Dungeon Master

Posts: 1531

Joined: Saturday, 5th March 2011, 06:29

Post Monday, 7th March 2011, 15:48

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

vintermann wrote:
mumra wrote:Don't know how to get around this, but I do think the game is missing out on a melee-style Brands user.


Crusaders?


Ok, I hadn't quite realised what Crusaders were. In that case I'd suggest moving them so they're next to Enchanter and Arcane Marksman in the menu.

Perhaps the menu overall needs splitting into 4 sub headings to make things clearer; Melee, Magic, Religious, Hybrid.

I also just noticed Stalker, another hybrid-type character.

Dungeon Master

Posts: 1613

Joined: Thursday, 16th December 2010, 21:54

Post Monday, 7th March 2011, 18:33

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

Currently the backgrounds are ordered in jobs.cc as:
Fighters (Fi/Gl/Mo)
Religious professions (Be/CK/DK/AK/Pr/He)
Spellcasting fighters and primary spellcasters (Cr/Wr/Wz/Cj/En/Su/Tm/FE/IE/AE/EE)
Poison specialists and stabbers and shooters (VM/St/As/Hu/Ar/AM/Wn).

I don't agree with most of the stuff on the OP but I do agree that maybe re-ordering some of the backgrounds would be a good idea. Hunters could be grouped with the fighters, hybrids could maybe be grouped together (Cr/Wr/Tm/AM?) as well as actual stabbing/stealth builds (En/St/As)? Something like that, at least.

Blades Runner

Posts: 546

Joined: Monday, 20th December 2010, 14:25

Post Tuesday, 8th March 2011, 06:12

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

MarvintheParanoidAndroid wrote:I don't agree with most of the stuff on the OP but I do agree that maybe re-ordering some of the backgrounds would be a good idea. Hunters could be grouped with the fighters, hybrids could maybe be grouped together (Cr/Wr/Tm/AM?) as well as actual stabbing/stealth builds (En/St/As)? Something like that, at least.


Agreed!

Having categories like Warrior, Zealot, Hybrid and Mage and Other would help give some clarity to a background screen that is bewildering to newbies. Eg,

  Code:
MAGES                   ZEALOTS                       HYBRIDS              WARRIORS
a- Conjurer             j- Abyssal Knight of Lugonu   p- Arcane Marksman   v- Asssasin
b- Air Elementalist     k- Berserker of Trog          q- Crusader          w- Fighter
c- Earth Elementalist   l- Chaos Knight of Xom        r- Enchanter         x- Gladiator
d- Fire Elementalist    m- Death Knight of Yred       s- Stalker           y- Hunter
e- Ice Elementalist     n- Healer of Elyvilon         t- Transmuter        z- Monk
f- Necromancer          o- Priest of Zin              u- Warper     
g- Summoner                                                                MISC
h- Venom Mage                                                              A- Artificer
i- Wizard                                                                  B- Wanderer

For this message the author smock has received thanks: 6
dolphin, mad, mumra, Tiber, vintermann, Zicher

Spider Stomper

Posts: 195

Joined: Thursday, 3rd February 2011, 13:14

Post Tuesday, 8th March 2011, 08:26

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

Smock, excellent suggestion, except I think we need a less roguelike-technical and more fantasy-sounding term than "hybrid". Battlemages, perhaps?
Crazy Yiuf mutters: "Good: bonuses. Bad: Boni. Ugly: Bonii!"

Blades Runner

Posts: 555

Joined: Tuesday, 4th January 2011, 13:38

Post Tuesday, 8th March 2011, 08:36

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

+1 for this idea, Smock!

There one minor problem though - the standard console window width is 80 characters, while your lineup ended at 87.
This could be solved by removing the gods' names from the Zealots group - the god these worship is mentioned in the class description anyway.

  Code:
MAGES                   ZEALOTS             BATTLEMAGES          WARRIORS
a- Conjurer             j- Abyssal Knight   p- Arcane Marksman   v- Asssasin
b- Air Elementalist     k- Berserker        q- Crusader          w- Fighter
c- Earth Elementalist   l- Chaos Knight     r- Enchanter         x- Gladiator
d- Fire Elementalist    m- Death Knight     s- Stalker           y- Hunter
e- Ice Elementalist     n- Healer           t- Transmuter        z- Monk
f- Necromancer          o- Priest           u- Warper     
g- Summoner                                                      MISC
h- Venom Mage                                                    A- Artificer
i- Wizard                                                        B- Wanderer


The width of this lineup is 77 chars, perfectly fit for a console window.
... and forgive us our YASDs,
As we forgive our developers,
And lead us not into the Abyss,
But deliver us from Sigmund,
For Thine is the Roguelike,
the Orb and the Victory,
now and forever.
User avatar

Vestibule Violator

Posts: 1533

Joined: Thursday, 16th December 2010, 20:52

Post Tuesday, 8th March 2011, 16:22

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

This is looking good!

I would just like to say that, when I was a starting player, a presentation like that would have helped me understand the backgrounds much better and probably got me to try a few more different ones earlier.

I would change the order of the columns though, to go:
Mages - Battlemages - Warriors - Zealots

Misc could fit under Zealots as well.
User avatar

Vestibule Violator

Posts: 1533

Joined: Thursday, 16th December 2010, 20:52

Post Tuesday, 8th March 2011, 16:29

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

Actually, on further reflection, I'd suggest:

Warriors - Zealots - Battlemages - Mages

Rationale:
Berserkers should at least be next to the Warriors column.

I feel that, for some reason, the straight-up melee classes should be listed first.

Then it proceeds in order of how much they rely on other things beyond / instead of melee.

Most of the zealots are really melee chars who just get some God perks to start.

Then there are the battlemages, who will rely heavily on mundane melee/ranged combat but also supplement it heavily with magic.

Then finally there are the Mages who are designed to get by almost exclusively by magic.

Blades Runner

Posts: 555

Joined: Tuesday, 4th January 2011, 13:38

Post Tuesday, 8th March 2011, 16:36

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

danr wrote:I would change the order of the columns though, to go:
Mages - Battlemages - Warriors - Zealots

Misc could fit under Zealots as well.


While a good point by itself, now I realize that the order suggested by Smock could confuse those players that have been with Crawl for some time. Now, the order pretty much fits the "Fighter - Zealot - Mage - Battlemage" pattern, with Battlemages being the most scattered category. Danr's suggested order would do the same. It may be good to keep this order in the rearrangement.

Also, how does an Artificer or a Wanderer fit under Zealots, when they follow no god? IMHO, their own category looks fine to me as in Smock's order.

Edit: You were quicker, danr :)
... and forgive us our YASDs,
As we forgive our developers,
And lead us not into the Abyss,
But deliver us from Sigmund,
For Thine is the Roguelike,
the Orb and the Victory,
now and forever.

Blades Runner

Posts: 554

Joined: Tuesday, 25th January 2011, 14:24

Post Tuesday, 8th March 2011, 17:30

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

Blades Runner

Posts: 546

Joined: Monday, 20th December 2010, 14:25

Post Wednesday, 9th March 2011, 13:14

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

In anyone is indeed partial to god names, this might be more attractive.

  Code:
12345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890
MAGES           ZEALOTS                        BATTLEMAGES         WARRIORS
a- Conjurer     j- Abyssal Knight of Lugonu    p- Arcane Marksman  v- Asssasin
b- Necromancer  k- Berserker of Trog           q- Crusader         w- Fighter
c- Summoner     l- Chaos Knight of Xom         r- Enchanter        x- Gladiator
d- Venom Mage   m- Death Knight of Yred        s- Stalker          y- Hunter
e- Wizard       n- Healer of Elyvilon          t- Transmuter       z- Monk
                o- Priest of Zin               u- Warper     
ELEMENTALISTS                                                      MISC
f- Air                                                             A- Artificer
g- Earth                                                           B- Wanderer
h- Fire     
i- Ice   

Dungeon Master

Posts: 1531

Joined: Saturday, 5th March 2011, 06:29

Post Wednesday, 9th March 2011, 17:06

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

smock wrote:Having categories like Warrior, Zealot, Hybrid and Mage and Other would help give some clarity to a background screen that is bewildering to newbies. Eg,

  Code:
MAGES                   ZEALOTS                       HYBRIDS              WARRIORS
a- Conjurer             j- Abyssal Knight of Lugonu   p- Arcane Marksman   v- Asssasin
b- Air Elementalist     k- Berserker of Trog          q- Crusader          w- Fighter
c- Earth Elementalist   l- Chaos Knight of Xom        r- Enchanter         x- Gladiator
d- Fire Elementalist    m- Death Knight of Yred       s- Stalker           y- Hunter
e- Ice Elementalist     n- Healer of Elyvilon         t- Transmuter        z- Monk
f- Necromancer          o- Priest of Zin              u- Warper     
g- Summoner                                                                MISC
h- Venom Mage                                                              A- Artificer
i- Wizard                                                                  B- Wanderer


Exactly what I had in mind - it actually makes it look like less choices (much easier to take in). I'd personally see Zealots on the RHS because they're more specialised. People see the fantasy staples of Fighter / Mage first, then the more intriguing fixed-God characters at the end.

Nice to see something out of this after my fairly lengthy initial rant! :)

Dungeon Master

Posts: 1531

Joined: Saturday, 5th March 2011, 06:29

Post Wednesday, 9th March 2011, 17:20

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

Working from Smock's last version (I like the elementalists in their own section), spaced out the columns a bit more. Moved Fighter and Berserker to top of their respective categories, they're the most straight-up melee characters. Moved Gladiator up also, should be next to Fighter. Oh, and fixed the spelling of Assassin :)

I think the God names are redundant and don't really tell you much (unless you already know who the God is, in which case you probably understand the background anyway).

Not too sure about Battlemages for the hybrid heading, perhaps Warmages has a better ring...

  Code:
12345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890
MAGES             BATTLEMAGES           WARRIORS        ZEALOTS                       
a- Conjurer       j- Arcane Marksman    p- Fighter      u- Berserker
b- Necromancer    k- Crusader           q- Gladiator    v- Abyssal Knight           
c- Summoner       l- Enchanter          r- Assassin     w- Chaos Knight
d- Venom Mage     m- Stalker            s- Hunter       x- Death Knight
e- Wizard         n- Transmuter         t- Monk         y- Healer
                  o- Warper                             z- Priest

ELEMENTALISTS                                           MISC
f- Air                                                  A- Artificer
g- Earth                                                B- Wanderer
h- Fire     
i- Ice   

Vaults Vanquisher

Posts: 476

Joined: Friday, 31st December 2010, 06:38

Post Wednesday, 9th March 2011, 17:31

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

Bluh, no, elementalists -are- still mages. They go under mages. The point is the simplify the process for new users.

Dungeon Master

Posts: 1531

Joined: Saturday, 5th March 2011, 06:29

Post Wednesday, 9th March 2011, 17:34

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

szanth wrote:Bluh, no, elementalists -are- still mages. They go under mages. The point is the simplify the process for new users.


Many of the Zealots are still Warriors. But they are also Zealots. It's about breaking the choices down into logical groups that make the overall presentation clearer, and for me eliminating the fourfold repetition of the word "Elementalist" does this nicely.

Vaults Vanquisher

Posts: 476

Joined: Friday, 31st December 2010, 06:38

Post Wednesday, 9th March 2011, 17:38

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

mumra wrote:
szanth wrote:Bluh, no, elementalists -are- still mages. They go under mages. The point is the simplify the process for new users.


Many of the Zealots are still Warriors. But they are also Zealots. It's about breaking the choices down into logical groups that make the overall presentation clearer, and for me eliminating the fourfold repetition of the word "Elementalist" does this nicely.


No, zealots differ because they start with a god. Big slashing line dividing them in difference.

Likewise, the big slashing line dividing everyone else from people who focus on magic? They focus on magic. Mages and elementalists are the same thing.

Dungeon Master

Posts: 3618

Joined: Thursday, 23rd December 2010, 12:43

Post Wednesday, 9th March 2011, 17:52

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

I like what I see. Mumra's proposal is very nice. Personally, I would move WARRIORS into the first column. In my opinion, it is good to start with something that everyone knows... the WARRIOR backgrounds are known, the MAGE ones much less so. WARMAGES would interpolate nicely between MAGE and WARRIOR but that's a very minor point. I am not so happy with MISC but I cannot come up with something better, unfortunately. I am not convinced on having an extra section for ELEMENTALISTS. After all, Venom Mage is a kind of elementalist, and Summoners and Necromancers are made in a very similar way.

Dungeon Master

Posts: 1531

Joined: Saturday, 5th March 2011, 06:29

Post Wednesday, 9th March 2011, 18:43

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

Moved Warriors to the left and went with Warmages (I too liked the interpolation :) )

Reshuffled things quite a bit - Crusader and Wizard moved to top of their categories as I think they're the most obvious of each category. Moved elementalists back into Mages. Reordered Elementalists and Knights to match old menu. Moved knights to bottom of list instead of being a block in the middle. Fixed spelling of Conjuror. Moved ranged backgrounds towards the end of their lists, there's (kind of) a melee->ranged transition now. Changed Misc to Other, it's at least a proper word not an abbreviation :) Layout-wise it might look better if Other was at the bottom-left as this would give a 1-line clearance below Warriors.

  Code:
12345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890
WARRIORS        WARMAGES              MAGES                    BELIEVERS
a- Fighter      f- Crusader           l- Wizard                u- Berserker
b- Gladiator    g- Enchanter          m- Conjuror              v- Healer
c- Monk         h- Transmuter         n- Summoner              w- Priest
d- Assassin     i- Warper             o- Necromancer           x- Chaos Knight
e- Hunter       j- Stalker            p- Venom Mage            y- Death Knight
                k- Arcane Marksman    q- Fire Elementalist     z- Abyssal Knight
                                      r- Ice Elementalist      OTHER
                                      s- Air Elementalist      A- Artificer
                                      t- Earth Elementalist    B- Wanderer


Edit: Changed Zealots -> Believers, perhaps is more accurate?

Lair Larrikin

Posts: 20

Joined: Wednesday, 9th February 2011, 21:38

Post Wednesday, 9th March 2011, 18:50

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

2. Conjurors; why are there only Fire/Earth and Ice/Air options? Why not Fire/Air and Earth/Ice? Air is an extremely useful school due to Repel/Deflect, Swiftness/Haste etc. and it'd be nice to have a Fire conjuror who was suited to going down that route.

They're useful school combinations but I don't think there are any shared Fire/Air or Earth/Ice spells. I wonder if something like a cloud mage could be a viable Fire/Air starting background with a starting spellbook something like

Shock - Evaporate - Mephitic Cloud - Conjure Flame - Poisonous Cloud - Ignite Poison

No idea what an Earth/Ice background would look like though.

Dungeon Master

Posts: 3618

Joined: Thursday, 23rd December 2010, 12:43

Post Wednesday, 9th March 2011, 18:51

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

Believer may more accurate, but Zealot sounds a lot better. I support moving OTHER to the far left, too.
Patch? :)
User avatar

Vestibule Violator

Posts: 1533

Joined: Thursday, 16th December 2010, 20:52

Post Wednesday, 9th March 2011, 18:57

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

I had some very similar ideas to your last post. I've done it as a word document as I found it a pain in the butt to move the text around as it was. The file is attached if anyone wants to tinker with it.

I also put warriors at the beginning, and crusaders and wizards at the top of their "fields".

However, I put Zealots (or Believers, or Adherents, or Faithful?) after Warriors - I think they are more similar to other warriors, and Berserkers should be in the neighbourhood of fighters. So its warrior, warriors with gods, warriors with magic, and then finally mages.

Also, I came up with "Adventurer" for the wanderer / artificer group, and put that below warriors.

I also had a shot at doing something similar with species, I hope you see a sort of logic in my groupings. The middle column could be split in two, perhaps one for normal size beings, and another for small / large?
Attachments
startscreens.png
startscreens.png (727.6 KiB) Viewed 17118 times
startscreen.zip
(7.63 KiB) Downloaded 4 times

Dungeon Master

Posts: 1531

Joined: Saturday, 5th March 2011, 06:29

Post Wednesday, 9th March 2011, 19:04

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

dpeg wrote:Believer may more accurate, but Zealot sounds a lot better. I support moving OTHER to the far left, too.
Patch? :)


Done that, although left them on A and B, it somehow feels better.

Now I'm going to suggest something radical that people might not like. For me the problem with the Elementalists is two-fold; visually they form a weird block that looks out of place. But secondly it implies something special, I look at it and think "Fire Elemental" as in someone who might have more than just fire magic; for instance, extra resistances, special abilties, and so forth. As pointed out, Venom Mage = Poison Elementalist pretty much, so what here is distinguished by the word Elementalist vs. Mage? A distinction is implied where there is none - not really a good thing. Venom Mage also now goes to the end:

  Code:
12345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890
WARRIORS        WARMAGES              MAGES                    ZEALOTS
a- Fighter      f- Crusader           l- Wizard                u- Berserker
b- Gladiator    g- Enchanter          m- Conjuror              v- Healer
c- Monk         h- Transmuter         n- Summoner              w- Priest
d- Assassin     i- Warper             o- Necromancer           x- Chaos Knight
e- Hunter       j- Stalker            p- Fire Mage             y- Death Knight
                k- Arcane Marksman    q- Ice Mage              z- Abyssal Knight
OTHER                                 r- Air Mage     
A- Artificer                          s- Earth Mage     
B- Wanderer                           t- Venom Mage   


Just saw danr's post and Mages definitely look better on the right, makes the whole thing a nice rectangular block. But yes it's a pain moving things around so I'll just wait for comments on my Mage change...

A patch might be a bit pre-emptive, don't know how easy the menu code is to mess with yet :)
User avatar

Vestibule Violator

Posts: 1533

Joined: Thursday, 16th December 2010, 20:52

Post Thursday, 10th March 2011, 18:23

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

Sorry for anyone who tried to post to this thread in the past few minutes, I locked it and split off two new topics - one for species categorization and one for the idea of unlocking species.

For this message the author danr has received thanks:
mumra
User avatar

Vestibule Violator

Posts: 1533

Joined: Thursday, 16th December 2010, 20:52

Post Thursday, 10th March 2011, 18:36

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

I'm leaning toward the "Mage" language myself now too - elementalist is sort of redundant, the Fire etc. already tells you they have to do with the fire element.

You could even do "Death Mage" instead of necromancer.

Come to think of it, "Conjurations" doesn't seem quite right either. To me, conjurations means making something appear out of thin air, or making things disappear. I don't know what a better word is for hurling magical bolts of flame and ice though. I don't know if we really need this class - Fire elementalists do a lot of what fire conjurers do. Whoa - I just checked, and I can't believe the redundancy between these two starting books.

As posted elsewhere, "Crusader" to me doesn't really make sense and it is not a good association for many people. I suggest Arcane Warrior - they are to Fighters what Arcane Marksmen are to Hunters.

Anyhow - does "Adventurer" work for the artificer / wanderer category?

Snake Sneak

Posts: 116

Joined: Saturday, 18th December 2010, 11:32

Post Thursday, 10th March 2011, 19:27

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

danr wrote:You could even do "Death Mage" instead of necromancer.


"Necromancer" is a more iconic name (and also cooler, imho). Let's not get all technical in Crawl's language.

Come to think of it, "Conjurations" doesn't seem quite right either. To me, conjurations means making something appear out of thin air, or making things disappear. I don't know what a better word is for hurling magical bolts of flame and ice though. I don't know if we really need this class - Fire elementalists do a lot of what fire conjurers do. Whoa - I just checked, and I can't believe the redundancy between these two starting books.


Well, Conjurations/Summoning was a magic school in Dungeons & Dragons that contained fireballs, lightning bolts and other blasting spells and since other spells were clearly summonings (with names like Summon Monster IV :) ), Conjuration as a name stuck to fireballs and stuff like that. Since most people who are familiar with fantasy had contact with D&D, this name doesn't seem out of place in Crawl. However, times have changed and this link might become obscure, so you may be right to say that a new name is needed. "Destruction", maybe?

Anyhow - does "Adventurer" work for the artificer / wanderer category?


I think it's great. Much better than "Misc" ;)
User avatar

Vestibule Violator

Posts: 1533

Joined: Thursday, 16th December 2010, 20:52

Post Thursday, 10th March 2011, 20:35

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

I did not know about the D&D use of "conjurations". I mean, I guess you are conjuring a fireball into existence.

When I think about what conjurations involves in Crawl, it's all about matter and energy (which as we all know are actually the same thing). Conjurations create matter and energy and typically hurl it at something.

Conjurations is fine.
User avatar

Dungeon Master

Posts: 4031

Joined: Thursday, 16th December 2010, 20:37

Location: France

Post Thursday, 10th March 2011, 22:09

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

zasvid wrote:
danr wrote:Anyhow - does "Adventurer" work for the artificer / wanderer category?


I think it's great. Much better than "Misc" ;)

Me too. I love it!
<+Grunt> You dereference an invalid pointer! Ouch! That really hurt! The game dies...
User avatar

Vestibule Violator

Posts: 1533

Joined: Thursday, 16th December 2010, 20:52

Post Thursday, 10th March 2011, 22:20

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

How complicated is that selection screen, coding-wise? Is this kind of reorganizing a complicated task?
User avatar

Dungeon Master

Posts: 4031

Joined: Thursday, 16th December 2010, 20:37

Location: France

Post Thursday, 10th March 2011, 22:31

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

danr wrote:How complicated is that selection screen, coding-wise? Is this kind of reorganizing a complicated task?

It's not very hard, but not trivial either. Currently, there's a simple loop that go over all the jobs, see the _construct_backgrounds_menu function in newgame.cc:955. For the page formatting, the code use the PrecisionMenu class, like the starting menu and the skill menu. I can do it, but I'm just back from my holidays and I have a lot on my todo list for 0.8. So if you feel like it, try. I'll help anyway.
<+Grunt> You dereference an invalid pointer! Ouch! That really hurt! The game dies...
User avatar

Vestibule Violator

Posts: 1533

Joined: Thursday, 16th December 2010, 20:52

Post Thursday, 10th March 2011, 22:38

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

My wife will go into labour literally any day now. I'll see if I get a chance to try.

Dungeon Master

Posts: 1531

Joined: Saturday, 5th March 2011, 06:29

Post Friday, 11th March 2011, 02:50

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

galehar wrote:
danr wrote:How complicated is that selection screen, coding-wise? Is this kind of reorganizing a complicated task?

It's not very hard, but not trivial either. Currently, there's a simple loop that go over all the jobs, see the _construct_backgrounds_menu function in newgame.cc:955. For the page formatting, the code use the PrecisionMenu class, like the starting menu and the skill menu. I can do it, but I'm just back from my holidays and I have a lot on my todo list for 0.8. So if you feel like it, try. I'll help anyway.


This is what I suspected, whenever someone says "that's going to be easy, right?" I just know it won't be that simple... I haven't looked at any of the code but at some point when I'm bored of HTML I might take a look :)

Abyss Ambulator

Posts: 1196

Joined: Friday, 17th December 2010, 13:59

Location: Maryland, USA

Post Friday, 11th March 2011, 14:03

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

danr wrote:My wife will go into labour literally any day now. I'll see if I get a chance to try.


OT, but congratulations! (And just remember that you can't Abjure away the new summon if it becomes problematic. It's a permanent spawn.)
You fall off the wall. You have a feeling of ineptitude.
User avatar

Dungeon Master

Posts: 4031

Joined: Thursday, 16th December 2010, 20:37

Location: France

Post Friday, 11th March 2011, 22:02

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

Well, I thought about how to implement it, to give you advices, and when I found a good design, it made me want to code it. So, here it is.
<+Grunt> You dereference an invalid pointer! Ouch! That really hurt! The game dies...

For this message the author galehar has received thanks: 4
danr, dolphin, mumra, smock
User avatar

Vestibule Violator

Posts: 1533

Joined: Thursday, 16th December 2010, 20:52

Post Friday, 11th March 2011, 23:10

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

Oh Galehar, you crazy dev you!

Halls Hopper

Posts: 60

Joined: Friday, 17th December 2010, 14:41

Post Sunday, 13th March 2011, 17:54

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

One slight observation about the new screen:

It shouts at you quite a lot. Why the capital letters? I think it would look better if:
  Code:
 Warrior:       Zealot:             Battlemage:          Mage:
 a - Fighter    h - Berserker       n - Crusader         t - Wizard
 b - Gladiator  i - Abyssal Knight  o - Enchanter        u - Conjurer
 c - Monk       j - Chaos Knight    p - Transmuter       v - Summoner
 d - Hunter     k - Death Knight    q - Stalker          w - Necromancer
 e - Assassin   l - Priest          r - Arcane Marksman  x - Fire Elementalist
               m - Healer          s - Warper           y - Ice Elementalist
 Adventurer:                                             z - Air Elementalist
 f - Artificer                                           A - Earth Elementalist
 g - Wanderer                                            B - Venom Mage
Go kiku!
User avatar

Dungeon Master

Posts: 4031

Joined: Thursday, 16th December 2010, 20:37

Location: France

Post Sunday, 13th March 2011, 19:58

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

casmith789 wrote:One slight observation about the new screen:

It shouts at you quite a lot. Why the capital letters?

Good point, I'll fix it. I'm also thinking of making section title bright white, plural and lose the semi-colon.
<+Grunt> You dereference an invalid pointer! Ouch! That really hurt! The game dies...

TGW

Halls Hopper

Posts: 82

Joined: Thursday, 16th December 2010, 22:14

Post Sunday, 13th March 2011, 20:25

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

Dungeon Master

Posts: 1531

Joined: Saturday, 5th March 2011, 06:29

Post Monday, 14th March 2011, 10:37

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

Looks great seeing it in latest build.

TGW wrote:https://crawl.develz.org/wiki/doku.php?id=dcss:brainstorm:interface:combochoice#tgw_s_proposed_class_order


I got hilariously close to TGW's order (except for the Warriors/Zealots split). Main thing looking at the current screen is the three Knights going to the bottom of their column. Maybe the Battlemages could also be reshuffled a bit (bring Warper up higher?)

Great stuff anyway :mrgreen:

Halls Hopper

Posts: 67

Joined: Wednesday, 23rd February 2011, 05:41

Post Tuesday, 15th March 2011, 13:45

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

It still looks ridiculous. Hey. Hey guys.


BATTLEMAGES.

Just one step short of Witches, I'd swear.
User avatar

Dungeon Master

Posts: 4031

Joined: Thursday, 16th December 2010, 20:37

Location: France

Post Tuesday, 15th March 2011, 14:02

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

OneTrueFelid wrote:It still looks ridiculous. Hey. Hey guys.


BATTLEMAGES.

Just one step short of Witches, I'd swear.

Care to enlighten us with a better proposal?
<+Grunt> You dereference an invalid pointer! Ouch! That really hurt! The game dies...

Halls Hopper

Posts: 67

Joined: Wednesday, 23rd February 2011, 05:41

Post Tuesday, 15th March 2011, 14:31

Re: Spellcaster backgrounds

Rename the Battlemages title because it looks ridiculous. A dozen ideas were thrown around IRC. Spellblade, for starters? Battlemages sounds like the title of a cheesy tabletop game.
Next

Return to Game Design Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 199 guests

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by ST Software for PTF.